The Choke's On You

The guys at the auto shop let slavegirls pay for their repairs with sex, and she was SO READY to pay!

Copyright 2026 by Pat Powers

Master always got her full attention when he used her.

Image source: Kink video 45388, "Kept Secrets: Kate Kennedy's and Stirling Cooper's Dark Fantasies," starring Kate Kennedy and Stirling Cooper.

Say Cheese!

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Tradwife Fantasy

Don't make fun of her ears! She fell into a mechanical rice picker, OK?

Whoa, Nelly!

 

Civitai beauty welcomes you to the page.

Some slavegirls suck cock so hard that getting them off once they've started is virtually impossible.

Image source: Kink.com video 32141, "Scaring the fuck out of Alani Pi, Day 2," starring Alani Pi (sucking) and Mike Hawk (sucked).

Be sure and read the fine print!

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Relationship Issues

Though she was tied to the post again, she was cheered by the thought that she and Master were getting closer to one another. Yesterday he had done this with a ten-foot pole!

Carissa Montgomery and the Pope in kink.com shoot 35037.

Keep on Chudding...

And this is why nobody likes Chudwahs...

Study Finds BDSM Is Good For Your Mental Health

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Christmas Boxes at Kink.com

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Soviet Style Heroic Sexual Imagery

"It's not good night, Grulenka ... it's good-bye!" Image source: Public Disgrace.com.
Found this pic on Public Disgrace, and for some reason, it has a real "art" feel to it. Especially the face of the woman on the bottom doing a little breath control of the woman riding her strap-on. She looks like one of those heroic Soviet-era nudes, all flaring nostrils and steely eyes and smiling but firm determination to advance the cause of worker's solidarity throughout the world. (That's James Deen adding to the woman's excitment from the rear.)


"Workers of the world unite! ... and strangle those capitalist beyotches!" Image source: Public Disgrace.com.

Heroic, indeed! That is one beautiful woman ... Image source: Public Disgrace.com.

Second Thoughts

"What have I got myself into?" Image source: Whipped Ass.com.
I feel like I'm on a roll with the images of damsels getting all expressive on us. Here we have a naked tied damsel on a bed looking all wistful, very second-thoughty, very much "I wonder if this is as good an idea as my genitals think it is?"

But it's not just her, the domme, played by the inimitable Sandra Romain, looks down at her, all "Mmmmm, what will I do with this toy I have all naked and tied up?"

A very evocative photo, indeed!

"Oh, THAT'S what I got myself into!"

Why 50 Shades Of Gray Is So Popular Now

"Oh, yeah! I feel so safe, secure and do-able!" Image source: Hogtied.com.
There have been many theories offered about the success of 50 Shades of Gray, and of course I have one, and of course no one has offered anything like it to date, so I figure I better get it in there so it can be ignored by the mainstream media in favor of lame vaguely WTF articles.

It's always been my feeling that culture is ultimately more important than politics in determining what happens in society. Culture is not obvious, it does not have spokespersons, it is not something that people do because they THINK it is right, but because they FEEL it is right. Culture is more like the subconscious of a society, while politics is a conscious phenomenon. What is argued out tediously by political hacks, operatives and suchlike is in politics is often decided without discussion in culture ... it is only noticed after it has occurred, with the political hacks and operatives squabbling about it after the fact.

This is EXACTLY what has happened with regard to 50 Shades of Gray. The book became popular without any marketing campaign, there was no publisher pushing it on the mommies who liked it, it just took off all by its lonesome.

Now why did this happen? Here's where I get theoretical. I think it happened because the women who enjoyed the bondage and dominance themes in 50 Shades of Gray felt safe in enjoying the fantasies. Comfortable, even. And that's because the respect for choice for women has finally trickled down to middle class women, and they feel safe from being FORCED to do the things enumerated in 50 Shades of Gray. Because it's not fun if you are FORCED to do the things enumerated in 50 Shades of Gray. Not having a choice takes the fun out of just about everything.

Now, granted, women may never have legally been REQUIRED to put up with being tied up and spanked, but for much of US history, for all practical purposes, their husbands COULD do that, whether they liked it or not. And that takes the fun out of it unless you're REALLY into it, and maybe even then, for many women.

And the thing is, women need to FEEL safe to enjoy the fantasies in 50 Shades of Gray, which is a whole 'nother thing. And I think what 50 Shades of Gray means is, regular middle class women finally DO feel safe about bondage fantasies.

This is wonderful news, great news, and not just for bondage fans, but for everybody. Because it means that the psychological freedom that feminism has long fought for has trickled down to middle class and probably a lot of lower class women. And as I said in my article on The Feminist Sex Wars, consensual bondage can only thrive in an atmosphere of freedom, where men and women honestly feel that they are making choice when they say "No" to rape or "Yes" to bondage, or vice versa. If sexual bondage is not consensual, it's just thuggery, and the rub for men is, women have to FEEL that sense of consensuality, you can't just TELL a woman she has a choice, because she has to FEEL that she has a choice for it to be valid.

Well, nobody MADE 50 Shades of Gray a success except its readers. That huge swell that political types felt passing under their feet (but could not understand) while they squabbled in ideological terms about 50 Shades of Gray was millions of women feeling safe enough in their personal lives to enjoy fantasies of being bound and dominated. Because they felt free. A great thing for us all.

And you can tell from the puzzled, angry reactions of some feminists that they feel betrayed by the woman who have embraced 50 Shades of Gray. "We fought for your freedoms as well as our own, we helped make your right to choose possible, and THIS is what you choose? How COULD you?" Well, that's the way it is when you give people freedom ... they don't always choose in ways that you would like. But so long as they retain the freedom ... it'll be all right, eventually. Wait and see.

Written this tenth day of May, 2012, so that now and forevermore, I shall be able to say, "I told you so."


"Now THIS is exercising freedom!" Image source: The Upper Floor.

Kinky, Kinky Genes

"It's a good thing I'm genetically programmed to like this ... otherwise, I might feel a little silly ..." Image source: Whipped Ass.com.
So I found an article online which considered the notion that dominance and submission behavior might have a genetic origin: a "sex fetish gene" was the way it was phrased in the headline, though the phrasing in the article was at the same both vaguer and more specific: "wired for dominance and submission."

I've always been kind of leery of these claims of genetic origins for sexual tastes. That's because the gay community long ago adopted the notion that gayness was genetically determined way back when. They claimed it was a result of early childhood feelings of gayness, etc., but there was an obvious social agenda item there: if gayness was genetically determined, people did not become gay because they were "converted" to gayness by other gays, as many cultural conservatives have maintained. (I.e., gays are awful sexual predators by nature who must be kept away from our innocent young men through harsh, stringent laws.) It was kind of a "vampire" model of sexuality, and claiming that gayness was genetically determined was the gay community's silver bullet of a response to that claim.

Only problem was, there was no scientific evidence that it was so. In fact, there's a huge scientific objection to it, in the form of evolutionary science. See, the way evolution works in the case of most traits, is that over hundreds of thousands of generations a trait that has a tiny, tiny evolutionary advantage ... say, it gives individuals in the species a one percent advantage in survival ... will eventually be present in 100 percent of the species. It's that slow grinding over thousands or even millions of generations that does the trick, and of course, the greater the advantage, the faster the change takes place.

This is also true for traits that have an unfavorable effect on reproductive success, except that instead of spreading throughout the population, they vanish over thousands of generations. Do you see where I am going? If there was ever a genetic trait that would have a drastically negative effect on reproductive success, it would have to be being sexually attracted to your own gender. No babies there!

I've heard a number of counter-arguments to this point: gayness may be a recessive trait that is carried along by a survival-enhancing dominant trait, gays tend to have children in primitive societies due to overwhelming pressures to do so whether they want to or not, gayness in siblings may have an advantage in that the gay siblings help raise the children of their straight brothers and sisters, etc.

None of it strikes me as a sufficiently powerful argument to deal with the stumbling block that evolutionary theory imposes: the thoroughness with which evolution deals with traits that have very tiny effects on reproductive success makes the overwhelming disadvantage imposed by genetic gayness seem, well ... impossible to overcome. Even if ALL of those factors combined reduced the reproductive disadvantage of gayness from, say, -90 percent to, say, -10 percent, that's still a HUGE disadvantage.

So my own personal feeling is .. I don't know, and I've not seen anything convincing enough to make me "know" that gayness either is or is not genetic.

Now in relation to bondage kink, John Norman back in the 80s took a hell of a lot of flack for claiming that women were submissive and men dominant in the "order of nature" which sounds kinda genetic. I never bought that either, but not on evolutionary grounds, after all, dominance and submission behavior could well be neutral in terms of reproductive success as it occurs in heterosexual couples and I've not seen any arguments, much less convincing ones, that it affects reproductive success at all.

I rejected Norman's line because it claims that since human beings may have certain natural tendencies towards dominance and submission, that every relationship between men and women must be determined by those tendencies. Now this might be true of chimps, baboons and monkeys, which are mostly instinctual creatures, but human beings engage in behaviors that are WAAAAAAY more complex than other great apes and monkeys. We play the banjo. We write computer programs. We write blogs! We don't do any of those things instinctively. By far the majority of human behavior is learned. Being human is mostly about engaging in learned behavior.

It is very evident that in respect to the learned behaviors that define human beings, women are pretty much the equals of men in every way, and should be treated as our equals, even if we did have a natural disposition to dominate them, which I don't necessarily buy anyway (not enuogh hard evidence). This does not mean we can't ENJOY dominance and submission feelings in our sex play, ramping up the differences between the sexes to ramp up our enjoyment of one another. But we don't have to behave like baboons just because we evolved from a species of ape much like baboons. We're humans!

So in my mind, the jury is out on the issue of kinky genes of every description. Maybe overwhelming evidence will come along some day, but in the meantime, I advocate tolerance and kindness. Seems to work out well in lieu of certainty.

Personal Ad

"I'm so famished after wearing that bacon-flavored gag all afternoon!"

Image source: Kink.com video 34922, "The Kennels" featuring (left to right) Juliette March, Daisy Ducati and Bella Rossi. Also, James Dean in the background.

Fifi thought about the personal ad that had led her to Master. "I enjoy candlelit dinners," it had said. "I enjoy long walks on the beach at sunset," the ad had said. It had left out the part about her naked, collared, leashed and on all fours. "I enjoy tenderness in a woman," the ad had said. It had left out the part about him being willing to spank or flog her skin to make it tender.

Still, she was somehow glad she'd answered the ad. For example, tonight's dinner was Alpo! So much better than those Weight Watchers meals.

Extreme Bondage on the Lifetime Channel: "Against Their Wills"

This prison inmate is so horny that she's actually grinning in triumph as she grabs a little middle-aged spread butt booty! Man, that's desperate.
You know how I keep talking about Lifetime Channel women in prison movies in my reviews of sexploitation women in prison movies? Well, I went ahead and reviewed one. And it has a couple of really strict bondage scenes. I mean, strict as in can't move anything but your head. How about a straightjacket hogtie? How about a psycho-sheet strapdown? Puts anything in the sexploitation films I've reviewed to date to shame.

And the bondage is actually relevant to the plot -- it helps establish the helplessness and vulnerability of the inmates in the prison, and given that the movie is about prison rape, the bondage makes the point very powerfully.

There's also some analysis of how the superior characterization of Lifetime Channel movies makes the dominance and submission elements of the story more powerful.

You can check out the review by clicking here.

Caged Fury: Beyond Bogus

Warden Sybil Thorn of Honeywell State Prison for Women, in uniform and out of uniform. Inmates get to see Warden Thorn up close and personal in both conditions ... whether they want to or not.
I've reviewed another women in prison movie, and this one is full of nakedness and violence as Dirk the Human Wrecking Ball personally demolishes an evil prison facility. I'm not kidding, this guy is so tough that he and his buddy Victor (played by Erik Estrada) go around terrorizing motorcycle gangs. Again, I am not kidding. Dirk makes Rambo look wussy.

And then there's the evil lesbian warden Sybil Thorn seen above. Few prisons let their officials work in Gay Pride uniforms, but Honeywell does. And of course she treats the inmates as her own private harem.

The plot is driven by an evil scheme that so ridiculously piles bogusness on top of bogusness that you feel a sort of admiration for anyone who has come up with a plan this complex to obtain something that you can easily buy in L.A. for chump change (by the standards of the wealthy).

Plus, there's the ugliest pants ever.

Fun will be had by all. Check it out at this link.

Chained Heat Reviewed

I'm going to have a lot of fun making you my bitch!

Image source: Vidcap from an old VHS tape of Chained Heat.

Over on Bondagerotica this week we have a review of the classic women in prison movie, Chained Heat. A lot of movies have copied this one, and done better in many respects to tell the truth. But none have had a smokin' hot Sybil Danning domming the daylights out of a luscious young Linda Blair. Check out the review here.

Third Prize At A Golf Tournament

Triumphant golfers parade down an avenue lined with booty from their victories on the course.

This is a photomanip that I made from a couple of images for a T-shirt design. One is obviously a photo from a golf tournament, with a horde of golf carts filled with middle-aged fat cats prepared to roll onto the course.

Sitting on the lawn facing them is a naked woman in bondage, with a big sign on the grass near her announcing that she's "Third Prize."

The reason I thought this manip worth doing was they way it updated traditional bondage imagery. There are a lot of images with themes like this out there, but most of them are things like slaves on the Via Appia kneeling as chariots roll past, etc. Very historical.

This updated image has a lot more bite to it. You can imagine the guys on the golf carts as a bunch of Rotarian types, probably already half looped before they hit the course, making all sorts of vulgar comments about what they plan to do if they win third prize. And she has to listen to it, alarmed, because she knows that whatever they want to do with her that doesn't injure or kill her, they'll be able to do. It's part of the terms of her deal with the local sheriff to get her off that methamphetamine distribution charge she's facing.

Or it's part of the deal the strip club she works for cooked up with the golf course, one she has to agree with because the strip club caught her blowing customers in the parking lot, and they'll fire her if she doesn't come through.

Oh, the scenarios are limitless. My favorite is, she's an art student who's trying to make money fast over the summer to finance her next year of college, as her parents have suffered financial reverses and can't support her any more, and this gig is the best deal she was able to find that didn't promise to land her in jail. So she must submit to men whom she considers trashy merchants, to whom she ordinarily wouldn't give the time of day. Very humiliating. And because she's not at any way at fault for her situation, it has a nice element of pathos as well.

Also, the golfers are fully dressed in casual golfing clothes while she's stark naked and staked out on the lawn. Very humiliating.

She's also third prize. Not first prize, not second. Third. I was thinking of displaying second prize as well, maybe a set of fountain pens or a desk calendar, but I couldn't think of a way to do it and make absolutely clear what it was. Too bad. That would have been very humiliating too.

It's the modernity of the image that makes all these interesting scenarios possible, and gives them their bite.

Dangerous Attraction

If there's one characteristic that sorta defines B-movies it's that even when the filmmakers have something on the ball, they've only got half of it on the ball. Their plotting and characterization are often really strong in one area, only to be incredibly weak and cheesy in another, or the story starts out really strong and dissolves into so much Silly String mush halfway through.

So it is with "Dangerous Attraction," an erotic thriller starring Andrea Roth and Rae Dawn Chong. There's some promising development of the main character early on. Some of the minor characters are interesting. There's an interesting relationship between the main character and her female boss. Andrea Roth's character gets bound and gagged with duct tape -- but the film could have been so much more! I have a review with caps at my website.

Dominance By Other Means

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.